Proposal:

Demolition of the existing buildings, excluding the façade of 30-32 Redchurch Street, and redevelopment to provide a mixed-use development within a single building rising to three, seven and nine storeys maximum AOD height circa 56m comprising office (up to 14,393 sqm of B1(a)) floorspace, up to 1,444 sqm flexible commercial floorspace (B1(a)/B1(c)), and up to 1,181 sqm flexible retail floorspace (Use Class A1 and A3) along with servicing facilities, cycle parking, vehicle parking and associated works.

This application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement

Recommendations:

Grant Planning Permission subject to conditions

Update report published.

Councillor Kevin Brady moved and Councillor Abdul Mukit MBE seconded a proposal that the consideration of the planning application at Land bounded by 2-10 Bethnal Green Road, 1-5 Chance Street (Huntingdon Industrial Estate) and 30-32 Redchurch Street, be DEFERRED to allow for further negotiations as it was considered that insufficient public benefits had been demonstrated to outweigh the less than substantial heritage harm. They therefore requested that Officers should seek to negotiate the following additional contributions: :

·       Improvements to the public realm of Redchurch Street.

·       Improved terms for the affordable workspace.

On a vote of 7 in favour and 0 against, the Committee agreed to defer the application for this information. The application would be brought back to a future Committee meeting in accordance with the Development Committee procedure rules.

Update report published

Paul Buckenham introduced the application for the demolition of the existing buildings, excluding the façade of 30-32 Redchurch Street, and redevelopment to provide a mixed-use development and associated works. The Committee noted that the update report covered additional clarifications and correctly reproduced the sunlight and daylight report.

Tanveer Rahman presented the report – explaining the character of the surrounding site, including the surrounding tall developments and emerging context. There were also a number of listed buildings nearby and the part of the site was located in the Redchurch Street Conservation Area. 12 letters of objections and on letter of support had been received, as set out on the presentation slides. Some supported elements of the proposal.

The Committee noted the following.

·       The key features of the application.

·       That in land use terms – it raised no land use issues and generally accorded with relevant policies.

·       The high quality design, including the delivery of affordable workspace for the lifetime of the development. This exceeded policy requirements,

·       That the scale, height and massing was considered to be appropriate and be in keeping with tall buildings context, providing a vibrant addition to the area.

·       The site is not in a secondary Preferred Office Location as stated in the Committee Report.

·       The Council’s tall building policy. It was considered that the lapsed appeal decision is a material planning consideration that overrides the conflict with Local Plan’s Tall Building’s policy.

·       Comparisons with the previously consented scheme in terms of the height and the step downs in the design to be in keeping with the area.

·       The Heritage Assessment. The development would only be slightly visible to local buildings. Whilst it was acknowledged that the scheme would add additional height to the area,  it would cause less than substantial harm to heritage assets, at the lower end. It was considered that public benefits would outweigh harm. These public benefits included: the provision of affordable work space, benefits for the local economy, a through route and pedestrian crossing

·       It was noted that neighbouring properties would be affected in terms of loss of sunlight and daylight. Details of the failings in VCS and NSL were noted, including the major adverse impacts. Officers did not consider that these impacts were of undue concern given the specific sitecontext of buildings with close relationships.

·       Officers were mindful of the concerns about overshadowing to the Owl and Pussycat public house’s ‘beer garden’ . Details of the assessment were set out in the report and the update and summarised at the meeting.

·       It was noted that the failures were broadly similar  to the and already existed for 21^st March and 21^st December. The results showed that there will be additional overshadowing over the consented scheme on 21^st June. Given this, and having regard to the consented scheme, Officers did not consider it would result in an unacceptable impacts.

·       In terms of overlooking, the impacts were not considered to be unacceptable. However, conditions were recommended  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5